02-26-2021, 12:02 PM
This page 3 & 4 discussion in this thread brings up a nice philosophical selection for comparing.
Whether explanations like "orange ray rebound" explain the contrast between Agua's spirituality and more multi-level (including mind) approaches -- other possibilities also exist, like a personal specific focus for the sake of a personal spiritual task planned at another level -- such explanations show a basic difference between the Law of One-related philosophy and Cassiopaean version. Because it doesn't make it a matter of good vs. evil, while the Cassiopaean version usually does.
In the Cassiopaean version, STO and STS exist as universal abstractions, as cosmic "thought centers", considered very real, and which beings are aligned with in differing proportions. STO pulls towards full consciousness and non-materiality, while STS pulls towards consciousness ultimately collapsing and "falling asleep" as matter. LKJ moralizes it in terms of "ignorance is bliss" being the core of materialism and in some way all STS mentality. The idea of STS-ness at the core of what turns consciousness into sleeping matter is very gnostic.
By contrast, Ra's version describes the cosmos as something much more organically evolving, in which good and evil are not handed down from the top-down. Instead, STO and STS emerged from the bottom-up as a result of logoses experimenting with tweaking the parameters of sub-creations. The fundamental division -- or creation of the illusion of non-unity -- is not the same division as the STS-STO division, unlike in LKJ's cosmology.
That's an extremely clear-cut difference in the cosmologies. However, the formulations of the Cassiopaeans, in the early years, do not go as far as LKJ does in differing in essence from what Ra formulated for a cosmology. As Montalk (montalk.net) shows, syntheses which do not lose sight of the heart of the Law of One cosmology are possible. Though I question the accuracy of the abstractions used by the C's, thinking that they oversimplify the cosmos too grossly, in a way which made it very easy for the Cassiopaean community to use it as a basis for a moralizing spirituality which turns everything into a crusade against evil.
Whether explanations like "orange ray rebound" explain the contrast between Agua's spirituality and more multi-level (including mind) approaches -- other possibilities also exist, like a personal specific focus for the sake of a personal spiritual task planned at another level -- such explanations show a basic difference between the Law of One-related philosophy and Cassiopaean version. Because it doesn't make it a matter of good vs. evil, while the Cassiopaean version usually does.
In the Cassiopaean version, STO and STS exist as universal abstractions, as cosmic "thought centers", considered very real, and which beings are aligned with in differing proportions. STO pulls towards full consciousness and non-materiality, while STS pulls towards consciousness ultimately collapsing and "falling asleep" as matter. LKJ moralizes it in terms of "ignorance is bliss" being the core of materialism and in some way all STS mentality. The idea of STS-ness at the core of what turns consciousness into sleeping matter is very gnostic.
By contrast, Ra's version describes the cosmos as something much more organically evolving, in which good and evil are not handed down from the top-down. Instead, STO and STS emerged from the bottom-up as a result of logoses experimenting with tweaking the parameters of sub-creations. The fundamental division -- or creation of the illusion of non-unity -- is not the same division as the STS-STO division, unlike in LKJ's cosmology.
That's an extremely clear-cut difference in the cosmologies. However, the formulations of the Cassiopaeans, in the early years, do not go as far as LKJ does in differing in essence from what Ra formulated for a cosmology. As Montalk (montalk.net) shows, syntheses which do not lose sight of the heart of the Law of One cosmology are possible. Though I question the accuracy of the abstractions used by the C's, thinking that they oversimplify the cosmos too grossly, in a way which made it very easy for the Cassiopaean community to use it as a basis for a moralizing spirituality which turns everything into a crusade against evil.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)